62 PIERIS NAPI. 



Fontia Napi, Duncan, Nat. Lib. Ent., Vol. Ill, p. 121, t. 9, (1835). 



Tachyptera Nnpi, Berge, Sclimetterlingsbucli, p. 94, t. 30, f. 4, (184'2). 



Pie7is Yenosa,Sexulder, "Pvoc. Bost. Nat. Hist. Soc, YIII, p. 182, (1861). Jior/-i.s, Synopsis, 



p. 320, (1862). Weidemeyn; Proc. Ent. Soc, Phila., Vol. II, p. 151, (1863). Kirby, 



Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 454, (1871). Edwards, Syn. N. Am. Lop., p. 4, (1872). 

 Pieris Nasturtii, Boisduva/, Lcj). Cal., p. 38, (1869). 

 Var. BRYONiiK, OcliscnhoinuT, {Papi/io B.) Schmctt., Eur. I, 2, p. 151, (1808). Pieris B., 



Godarf, Ene. Mctli., Vol. IX, p. 162, (1819). Stmidinger, Cat. Lep. Eur. I, p. 3, 



(1871). Kirby, Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 453, (1871). 

 Papilio Napi, Espcr, Schniett., I, 2, t. 64, (1743). Hubner, Eur. Schmett., \o\. I, f. 407, 



(1798-1803). 

 Var. SABELLia*:, Stephens, [Pontia S.) 111. Brit. Ent. Haust, I, p. 21, t. 3, (1827). Dioncan, 



Nat. Lib. Ent., Vol. Ill, p. 123, t. 8, f. 3, (1835). Pieris S., Kirby, Cat. Diurnal 



Lep., p. 453, (1871). 

 Var. 'Nai-ae.v, Esper, {Papilio N.) Schmett., I, 2, t. 116, f. 5,(1800). Hubner, Eur. Schmett., 



Vol. I, f 664, 665, (1803-1818). Pontia N., Duncan, Nat. Lib. Ent., Vol. Ill, p. 



122, (1835). Pirns N., Stnudinger, Cat. Lep. Eur. I, p. 3, (1871). Kirby, Cat. 



Diurnal Lep., p. 453, (1871). 

 Var. Pallida, Scudder, Proc. Bost. Nat. Hist. Soc, VIII, p. 183, (1861). Morris, Synopsis, 



p. 321, (1862). Weidemeyer, Proc Ent. Soc, Phila., Vol. II, p. 151, (1863). Kirby, 



Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 455, (1871). Edwards, Syn. N. Am. Lep., p. 5, (1872). 

 Pieris Iberidis, Boisduval, Lep. Cal., p. 39, (1869). 

 Pieris Castoria, Reakirt, Proc. Acad. Nat.Sc, Phila., p. 238, (1866). Kirby, Cat. Diurnal Lep., 



p. 464, (1871). Edwards, Syn. N. Am. Lep., p. 4, (1872). 

 Pieris Reseda, Boisduval, Lep. Cal., p. 39, (1869). 



PLATE VIII, FKi 2, PIERIS VENOSA, Scudder, cf. 3, ?, 



FIG. 4, PIERIS PALLIDA, Scudder, (P. Castoria, Beakirt,) cT- 5, ?. 



I present the figs. 2 — 5 to ray friends, the Lepidopterists that they may for themselves judge whether the 

 insects represented should occupy positions as distinct species, or whether they be, as I firmly believe, only 

 forms of P. Napi. 



Figs. 4 and 5 have been drawn from Rcakirt'.s original types of P. Castoria, which Mr. Scudder informs 

 me is identical with his P. Pallida,* the description of which appeared five years jirevious to Mr. ReaUirt's. 



In the obsolescence of the dark scales, which in ordinary forms define the neureation on the under surface 

 of P. Napi, it approaches closely the var. Napaetc, in fact the only difference observable is the absence of the 

 two black spots on under side of primaries, but this is not a specific distinction as one-third of my European 

 examples are also destitute of those spots on under surfiice, and in some examples on upper surfiice also. 

 Moreover the absence or presence of these spots is not a peculiarity confined particularly to this species (Napi), 

 for in the common form of P. Rapie these spots arc in some instances almost obsolete, and in others entirely 

 wanting ; in the var. Ergane, found in Dalmatia and Turkey, they do not occur at all, and in the var. 

 Maunii are quite indistinct and often entirely absent. 



In fact, there is no more difference between P. Pallida (Castoria) and the typical P. Napi, than between 

 the latter and some of its European and Asiatic varieties and aberrant forms, and the more I have studied the 

 many examples at my command the more am I convinced that P. Pallida is but a form of P. Napi. 



P. Venosa can scarcely be considered even as a variety ; it resembles the ordinary P. Napi to such a 

 degree that we are forced to believe in their identity. 



I have a 9 from Japan in nowise differing from the Califm-nia examples. 



May not, perhaps, P. Venosa and P. Pallida be the spring and summer generation, thus accounting for 

 the depth of markings in the former, as is the case with P. Napi and Napaea, P. Vernalis and P. Protodice, 

 Pap. Ajax and Pap.' Marcellus, Van. Levana and Van. Prorsa, &c. Our California friends can best tell us 

 if such be the case, or whether they both emerge from the chrysalis at the same season of the year. 



But neither form is by any means constant; I have them from the almost immaculate examples of 

 P. Pallida, in regular gradations, to the heaviest marked P. Venosa, and where the one ceases and the other 



•*In sijcakins; of P. Pallida and P. Marginalis, I always do so with the understanding that the former is the same as P. Castoria, and 

 the latter as P. Yreka, which iSIr. Scudder informed me' was the case, after inspecting the tyjies of the two latter; I have not seen 

 Mr. Scudder's types of either P. Pallida or- P. MarginalLs, therefore I make this explanation, although I have implicit reliance on 

 Mr. Scudder's acquaintance with his own species, and write accordingly. 



